@mclow.lists brought up this issue up in IRC.
It is a reasonably common problem to compare some two values for equality.
Those may be just some integers, strings or arrays of integers.
In C, there is memcmp(), bcmp() functions.
In C++, there exists std::equal() algorithm.
One can also write that function manually.
libstdc++'s std::equal() is specialized to directly call memcmp() for
various types, but not std::byte from C++2a. https://godbolt.org/z/mx2ejJ
libc++ does not do anything like that, it simply relies on simple C++'s
operator==(). https://godbolt.org/z/er0Zwf (GOOD!)
So likely, there exists a certain performance opportunities.
Let's compare performance of naive std::equal() (no memcmp()) with one that
is using memcmp() (in this case, compiled with modified compiler).
#include <algorithm> #include <cmath> #include <cstdint> #include <iterator> #include <limits> #include <random> #include <type_traits> #include <utility> #include <vector> #include "benchmark/benchmark.h" template <class T> bool equal(T* a, T* a_end, T* b) noexcept { for (; a != a_end; ++a, ++b) { if (*a != *b) return false; } return true; } template <typename T> std::vector<T> getVectorOfRandomNumbers(size_t count) { std::random_device rd; std::mt19937 gen(rd()); std::uniform_int_distribution<T> dis(std::numeric_limits<T>::min(), std::numeric_limits<T>::max()); std::vector<T> v; v.reserve(count); std::generate_n(std::back_inserter(v), count, [&dis, &gen]() { return dis(gen); }); assert(v.size() == count); return v; } struct Identical { template <typename T> static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) { auto Tmp = getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count); return std::make_pair(Tmp, std::move(Tmp)); } }; struct InequalHalfway { template <typename T> static std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Gen(size_t count) { auto V0 = getVectorOfRandomNumbers<T>(count); auto V1 = V0; V1[V1.size() / size_t(2)]++; // just change the value. return std::make_pair(std::move(V0), std::move(V1)); } }; template <class T, class Gen> void BM_bcmp(benchmark::State& state) { const size_t Length = state.range(0); const std::pair<std::vector<T>, std::vector<T>> Data = Gen::template Gen<T>(Length); const std::vector<T>& a = Data.first; const std::vector<T>& b = Data.second; assert(a.size() == Length && b.size() == a.size()); benchmark::ClobberMemory(); benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a); benchmark::DoNotOptimize(a.data()); benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b); benchmark::DoNotOptimize(b.data()); for (auto _ : state) { const bool is_equal = equal(a.data(), a.data() + a.size(), b.data()); benchmark::DoNotOptimize(is_equal); } state.SetComplexityN(Length); state.counters["eltcnt"] = benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariant); state.counters["eltcnt/sec"] = benchmark::Counter(Length, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate); const size_t BytesRead = 2 * sizeof(T) * Length; state.counters["bytes_read/iteration"] = benchmark::Counter(BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kDefaults, benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024); state.counters["bytes_read/sec"] = benchmark::Counter( BytesRead, benchmark::Counter::kIsIterationInvariantRate, benchmark::Counter::OneK::kIs1024); } template <typename T> static void CustomArguments(benchmark::internal::Benchmark* b) { const size_t L2SizeBytes = []() { for (const benchmark::CPUInfo::CacheInfo& I : benchmark::CPUInfo::Get().caches) { if (I.level == 2) return I.size; } return 0; }(); // What is the largest range we can check to always fit within given L2 cache? const size_t MaxLen = L2SizeBytes / /*total bufs*/ 2 / /*maximal elt size*/ sizeof(T) / /*safety margin*/ 2; b->RangeMultiplier(2)->Range(1, MaxLen)->Complexity(benchmark::oN); } BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint8_t, Identical) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint16_t, Identical) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint32_t, Identical) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint64_t, Identical) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint8_t, InequalHalfway) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint8_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint16_t, InequalHalfway) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint16_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint32_t, InequalHalfway) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint32_t>); BENCHMARK_TEMPLATE(BM_bcmp, uint64_t, InequalHalfway) ->Apply(CustomArguments<uint64_t>);
$ ~/src/googlebenchmark/tools/compare.py --no-utest benchmarks build-{old,new}/test/llvm-bcmp-bench RUNNING: build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpb6PEUx 2019-04-25 21:17:11 Running build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s) CPU Caches: L1 Data 16K (x8) L1 Instruction 64K (x4) L2 Unified 2048K (x4) L3 Unified 8192K (x1) Load Average: 0.65, 3.90, 4.14 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Benchmark Time CPU Iterations UserCounters... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 432131 ns 432101 ns 1613 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=2.20706G/s eltcnt=825.856M eltcnt/sec=1.18491G/s BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_BigO 0.86 N 0.86 N BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_RMS 8 % 8 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 161408 ns 161409 ns 4027 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=5.90843G/s eltcnt=1030.91M eltcnt/sec=1.58603G/s BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_BigO 0.67 N 0.67 N BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_RMS 25 % 25 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 81497 ns 81488 ns 8415 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=11.7032G/s eltcnt=1077.12M eltcnt/sec=1.57078G/s BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_BigO 0.71 N 0.71 N BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_RMS 42 % 42 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 50138 ns 50138 ns 10909 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=19.0209G/s eltcnt=698.176M eltcnt/sec=1.27647G/s BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_BigO 0.84 N 0.84 N BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_RMS 27 % 27 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 192405 ns 192392 ns 3638 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=4.95694G/s eltcnt=1.86266G eltcnt/sec=2.66124G/s BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.38 N 0.38 N BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 3 % 3 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 127858 ns 127860 ns 5477 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=7.45873G/s eltcnt=1.40211G eltcnt/sec=2.00219G/s BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.50 N 0.50 N BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 0 % 0 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 49140 ns 49140 ns 14281 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=19.4072G/s eltcnt=1.82797G eltcnt/sec=2.60478G/s BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.40 N 0.40 N BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 18 % 18 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 32101 ns 32099 ns 21786 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=29.7101G/s eltcnt=1.3943G eltcnt/sec=1.99381G/s BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.50 N 0.50 N BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 1 % 1 % RUNNING: build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench --benchmark_out=/tmp/tmpQ46PP0 2019-04-25 21:19:29 Running build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench Run on (8 X 4000 MHz CPU s) CPU Caches: L1 Data 16K (x8) L1 Instruction 64K (x4) L2 Unified 2048K (x4) L3 Unified 8192K (x1) Load Average: 1.01, 2.85, 3.71 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Benchmark Time CPU Iterations UserCounters... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 18593 ns 18590 ns 37565 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=51.2991G/s eltcnt=19.2333G eltcnt/sec=27.541G/s BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_BigO 0.04 N 0.04 N BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>_RMS 37 % 37 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 18950 ns 18948 ns 37223 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=50.3324G/s eltcnt=9.52909G eltcnt/sec=13.511G/s BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_BigO 0.08 N 0.08 N BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>_RMS 34 % 34 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 18627 ns 18627 ns 37895 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=51.198G/s eltcnt=4.85056G eltcnt/sec=6.87168G/s BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_BigO 0.16 N 0.16 N BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>_RMS 35 % 35 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 18855 ns 18855 ns 37458 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=50.5791G/s eltcnt=2.39731G eltcnt/sec=3.3943G/s BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_BigO 0.32 N 0.32 N BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>_RMS 33 % 33 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 9570 ns 9569 ns 73500 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=99.6601G/s eltcnt=37.632G eltcnt/sec=53.5046G/s BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.02 N 0.02 N BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 29 % 29 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 9547 ns 9547 ns 74343 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=99.8971G/s eltcnt=19.0318G eltcnt/sec=26.8159G/s BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.04 N 0.04 N BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 29 % 29 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 9396 ns 9394 ns 73521 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=101.518G/s eltcnt=9.41069G eltcnt/sec=13.6255G/s BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.08 N 0.08 N BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 30 % 30 % <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 9499 ns 9498 ns 73802 bytes_read/iteration=1000k bytes_read/sec=100.405G/s eltcnt=4.72333G eltcnt/sec=6.73808G/s BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_BigO 0.16 N 0.16 N BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>_RMS 28 % 28 % Comparing build-old/test/llvm-bcmp-bench to build-new/test/llvm-bcmp-bench Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, Identical>/512000 -0.9570 -0.9570 432131 18593 432101 18590 <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, Identical>/256000 -0.8826 -0.8826 161408 18950 161409 18948 <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, Identical>/128000 -0.7714 -0.7714 81497 18627 81488 18627 <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, Identical>/64000 -0.6239 -0.6239 50138 18855 50138 18855 <...> BM_bcmp<uint8_t, InequalHalfway>/512000 -0.9503 -0.9503 192405 9570 192392 9569 <...> BM_bcmp<uint16_t, InequalHalfway>/256000 -0.9253 -0.9253 127858 9547 127860 9547 <...> BM_bcmp<uint32_t, InequalHalfway>/128000 -0.8088 -0.8088 49140 9396 49140 9394 <...> BM_bcmp<uint64_t, InequalHalfway>/64000 -0.7041 -0.7041 32101 9499 32099 9498
What can we tell from the benchmark?
- Performance of naive equality check somewhat improves with element size, maxing out at eltcnt/sec=1.58603G/s for uint16_t, or bytes_read/sec=19.0209G/s for uint64_t. I think, that instability implies performance problems.
- Performance of memcmp()-aware benchmark always maxes out at around bytes_read/sec=51.2991G/s for every type. That is 2.6x the throughput of the naive variant!
- eltcnt/sec metric for the memcmp()-aware benchmark maxes out at eltcnt/sec=27.541G/s for uint8_t (was: eltcnt/sec=1.18491G/s, so 24x) and linearly decreases with element size. For uint64_t, it's ~4x+ the elements/second.
- The call obvious is more pricey than the loop, with small element count. As it can be seen from the full output , the memcmp() is almost universally worse, independent of the element size (and thus buffer size) when element count is less than 8.
So all in all, bcmp idiom does indeed pose untapped performance headroom.
This diff does implement said idiom recognition. I think a reasonable test
coverage is present, but do tell if there is anything obvious missing.
Now, quality. This does succeed to build and pass the test-suite, at least
without any non-bundled elements.
This transform fires 91 times:
$ /build/test-suite/utils/compare.py -m loop-idiom.NumBCmp result-new.json Tests: 1149 Metric: loop-idiom.NumBCmp Program result-new MultiSourc...Benchmarks/7zip/7zip-benchmark 79.00 MultiSource/Applications/d/make_dparser 3.00 SingleSource/UnitTests/vla 2.00 MultiSource/Applications/Burg/burg 1.00 MultiSourc.../Applications/JM/lencod/lencod 1.00 MultiSource/Applications/lemon/lemon 1.00 MultiSource/Benchmarks/Bullet/bullet 1.00 MultiSourc...e/Benchmarks/MallocBench/gs/gs 1.00 MultiSourc...gs-C/TimberWolfMC/timberwolfmc 1.00 MultiSourc...Prolangs-C/simulator/simulator 1.00
The size changes are:
I'm not sure what's going on with SingleSource/UnitTests/vla.test yet, did not look.
$ /build/test-suite/utils/compare.py -m size..text result-{old,new}.json --filter-hash Tests: 1149 Same hash: 907 (filtered out) Remaining: 242 Metric: size..text Program result-old result-new diff test-suite...ingleSource/UnitTests/vla.test 753.00 833.00 10.6% test-suite...marks/7zip/7zip-benchmark.test 1001697.00 966657.00 -3.5% test-suite...ngs-C/simulator/simulator.test 32369.00 32321.00 -0.1% test-suite...plications/d/make_dparser.test 89585.00 89505.00 -0.1% test-suite...ce/Applications/Burg/burg.test 40817.00 40785.00 -0.1% test-suite.../Applications/lemon/lemon.test 47281.00 47249.00 -0.1% test-suite...TimberWolfMC/timberwolfmc.test 250065.00 250113.00 0.0% test-suite...chmarks/MallocBench/gs/gs.test 149889.00 149873.00 -0.0% test-suite...ications/JM/lencod/lencod.test 769585.00 769569.00 -0.0% test-suite.../Benchmarks/Bullet/bullet.test 770049.00 770049.00 0.0% test-suite...HMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/128 NaN NaN nan% test-suite...HMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/256 NaN NaN nan% test-suite...CHMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/64 NaN NaN nan% test-suite...CHMARK_ANISTROPIC_DIFFUSION/32 NaN NaN nan% test-suite...ENCHMARK_BILATERAL_FILTER/64/4 NaN NaN nan% Geomean difference nan% result-old result-new diff count 1.000000e+01 10.00000 10.000000 mean 3.152090e+05 311695.40000 0.006749 std 3.790398e+05 372091.42232 0.036605 min 7.530000e+02 833.00000 -0.034981 25% 4.243300e+04 42401.00000 -0.000866 50% 1.197370e+05 119689.00000 -0.000392 75% 6.397050e+05 639705.00000 -0.000005 max 1.001697e+06 966657.00000 0.106242
I don't have timings though.
And now to the code. The basic idea is to completely replace the whole loop.
If we can't fully kill it, don't transform.
I have left one or two comments in the code, so hopefully it can be understood.
Also, there is a few TODO's that i have left for follow-ups:
- widening of memcmp()/bcmp()
- step smaller than the comparison size
- Metadata propagation
- more than two blocks as long as there is still a single backedge?
- ???
Is there any reason for the trailing _ ?